• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Can religion exist separately from politics?

Can we separate religion from politics?

  • Yes, it is easy

    Votes: 7 23.3%
  • Yes, but it is difficult

    Votes: 9 30.0%
  • No, we cannot

    Votes: 14 46.7%

  • Total voters
    30
  • Poll closed .

danieldemol

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
My intuitive feeling is that religion (yes I'm mainly reffering to the Abrahamic religions here) is mostly a collection of outdated politics. So if you take the politics which have become tradition in religion out of it, there wouldn't be much left other than basically prayer and fasting. Which I would see as a pretty skeletal form of religion. For example the Jews have 613 commandments or something. Can you imagine them tossing all that out in favour of simply prayer and fasting? I can't.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
It seems to me that a lot about religion concerns society as a whole:
Organizing as a community, choosing who belongs and who does not;
who prays when, and with whom;
how men and women are supposed to act at home, or in public;
how to raise a child, and what to teach it.
Telling people what are good acts, and what is bad;
watching them, judging them, praising them, and punishing them.

A lot about politics also concerns society as a whole:
What is legal, what is illegal; watching them, judging them, punishing them, hurting them.
Who is allowed, who isn't; who is in power, and who is its victim.
How people are to organize, choosing who belongs and who does not;
what a community, a belief, an ideology, a religion, is allowed to do.


Do you think they can easily be separated?

How would you separate religion (or lack of it) from politics?

You missed anti-theism in politics and totalitarianism like you had described vividly. I suppose that would mean you put atheism into the bucket of "religions".
 

Reddwarffan

Member
It is a very important point of view. The separation between Church (or churches) and State has enabled us to respect all religions. We have created a form of secularism that gives anyone absolute freedom of self-determination, politically, religiously, etc...
But the passage you quoted (and I really, really thank you for bringing it up) shows that it is Biblical values that predisposed our Western Civilization to be tolerant towards the neighbor, the foreigner and the different.
And religiously speaking, towards atheists or agnostics too.
So therefore, it is true that at least in Europe we have certain Biblical values as cultural foundation of the philosophical pillars that inspired our juridical tradition.

I agree with that. But I am afraid this modern secularism is not under threat from atheists or agnostics, but rather from religious extremists that abuse the modern concept of "freedom of religion" to introduce oppressive ideologies. Like Thomas Mann said: "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil."

Alas, this is why Western Europe has become a breeding ground for radical islamists. To wit: Contribution of ISIS jihadists from Europe: Many thousands from the UK, Holland, France, Germany, etc. From Azerbeijan (a 99% muslim country, but with a robust secular constitution): Zero (as far as I know).

I think that should raise some concern.
 

HonestJoe

Well-Known Member
Do you think they can easily be separated?
As long as religion is part of society it will be a factor in the politics of that society, just like everything else in society. The whole point of politics is to formalise the running and management of society and so it has to address all of it's elements one way or another.

Even the idea of separation of church and state is an example of religion being involved in politics. Even if it was (could be!) completely achieved, the very act of separating religion from politics would be a political act involving religion.
 

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
You missed anti-theism in politics and totalitarianism like you had described vividly. I suppose that would mean you put atheism into the bucket of "religions".
I did not miss it.
I did not want to put anything into buckets.
My concerns are with religion outside of politics
I simply wondered whether this could exist
 

Vee

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
[QUOTE="RedMoonRising, post: 6983838, member: 70744"
Do you think they can easily be separated?

How would you separate religion (or lack of it) from politics?[/QUOTE]

Easy, no. Politics is part of most aspects of our lives and it's hard not to mix it with everything else. However, mixing politics and religion for me is the receipt for disaster. I'm neutral with what comes to politics and I'm glad.
I think religious entities should stay away from political matters and focus on their own mission. There is a lot they could do to make the world a better place without meddling in things that don't concern them.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
I did not miss it.
I did not want to put anything into buckets.
My concerns are with religion outside of politics
I simply wondered whether this could exist

Yes it could exist. It depends on the dominance of that particular religion. Almost every single Buddhist nation has had heavy Buddhist influence in politics. They call themselves "Buddhist" nations. But in a country where Buddhism is only like 0.5%, it is completely cloven form politics. In some countries Hinduism does not have anything to do with politics, but in India it does. Just two examples.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
It seems to me that a lot about religion concerns society as a whole:
Organizing as a community, choosing who belongs and who does not;who prays when, and with whom;
how men and women are supposed to act at home, or in public;how to raise a child, and what to teach it.
Telling people what are good acts, and what is bad;watching them, judging them, praising them, and punishing them.
A lot about politics also concerns society as a whole:What is legal, what is illegal; watching them, judging them, punishing them, hurting them.
Who is allowed, who isn't; who is in power, and who is its victim.How people are to organize, choosing who belongs and who does not;
what a community, a belief, an ideology, a religion, is allowed to do. Do you think they can easily be separated? How would you separate religion (or lack of it) from politics?

Under the Constitution of the Mosaic Law for 'ancient Israel' we read about separation of 'church' and 'state' at 2 Chronicles 26:16-21.
The King ( political ) was Not to interfere with the Priestly ( religious ) duties and vice versa.
Not the political kings, but the religious, the priests were chosen to preserve Scripture for us.
Thus, ancient Israel was organized, or an organized organization taking care of both governmental needs of the people besides their spiritual needs.
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
.........Even the idea of separation of church and state is an example of religion being involved in politics. Even if it was (could be!) completely achieved, the very act of separating religion from politics would be a political act involving religion.
Interesting thoughts ^ above ^. It makes my mind drift back to the time Pres. Reagan was running for office.
Reagan endorsed the fundamental religious sector because they moved the center of the debate about the political and abortion issue into the public square.
Thus, it just appeared as if a vote for Reagan to win the election would be a moral vote for their moral-social agenda.
Reagan saw their 'political push', so to speak, and so he used it to just give them ' lip service '.
 

Alea iacta est

Pretend that I wrote something cool.
I think it depends on the religion. Many religions can be separated from the politics. But religions such as Islam makes it difficult to separate it at all. Christianity is difficult but not impossible.
 

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
Under the Constitution of the Mosaic Law for 'ancient Israel' we read about separation of 'church' and 'state' at 2 Chronicles 26:16-21.
The King ( political ) was Not to interfere with the Priestly ( religious ) duties and vice versa.
Not the political kings, but the religious, the priests were chosen to preserve Scripture for us.
Thus, ancient Israel was organized, or an organized organization taking care of both governmental needs of the people besides their spiritual needs.
Were the kings not chosen by your God?
It would look like to me as if the God of Israel used to be very political.
 

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
I think it depends on the religion. Many religions can be separated from the politics. But religions such as Islam makes it difficult to separate it at all. Christianity is difficult but not impossible.
Which religious would you say can be separated from issues concerning the body politic?
 

Kooky

Freedom from Sanity
Do you think they can easily be separated?

How would you separate religion (or lack of it) from politics?

Easy, no. Politics is part of most aspects of our lives and it's hard not to mix it with everything else. However, mixing politics and religion for me is the receipt for disaster. I'm neutral with what comes to politics and I'm glad.
I think religious entities should stay away from political matters and focus on their own mission. There is a lot they could do to make the world a better place without meddling in things that don't concern them.
But if their beliefs suggest certain political decisions
then how can we expect them to stay away from politics?
It seems that would deny people their unique way of life, no?

Personally I think it's hard to draw lines in the sand like this,
because the sands are always shifting
and the lines never clearly visible to me.
 

Wandering Monk

Well-Known Member
If you accept that the basis of politics is law, the basis of law is ethics, and the basis of ethics is usually religion, then there seems no way to separate politics and religion.
 
WHY should religion and politics be separated?

Religion reflects a person's, or a family's, or a community's values.

Politics can (and will) come into conflict with one's religious values from time to time. The ongoing abortion debate is the best example. Those who believe that life begins at conception generally have that view because of their religious faith (although, oddly, there are some atheist pro-lifers).

In that regard, those people will naturally support politicians who also share that view.

You CAN separate religion from politics...But it generally doesn't turn out the way it's expected. The most brutal regimes to ever exist on the face of the earth were expressly non-religious.
 
Enforce the law of the Constitution that establishes America as a secular state.

America was not established as a secular state. It was established with a Federal Government that has no official religion, and tolerates all faiths...But that's not the same as being expressly secular.

In fact, as written, the 1st Amendment protects religion from the state...Not the other way around, as is commonly thought.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
America was not established as a secular state. It was established with a Federal Government that has no official religion, and tolerates all faiths...But that's not the same as being expressly secular.

In fact, as written, the 1st Amendment protects religion from the state...Not the other way around, as is commonly thought.
Congress make no laws respecting the establishment of religion. There shall be no tests of public faith to hold office. Those are the laws.
The United States of America was not, in any way, established upon Christian principles. That's an early treaty signed by the Founding Fathers.
We've even had a judge say that though America is a nation with predominantly Christians, the government itself is secular.
Even many Christians were on board to keep a wall between church and state so the dogma of one denomination cannot impede upon the beliefs of another denomination.
Amd you said it yourself. Founded with no official religion. That means secular.
 
Last edited:
Congress make no laws respecting the establishment of religion. There shall be no tests of public faith to hold office. Those are the laws.
The United States of America was not, in any way, established upon Christian principles. That's an early treaty signed by the Founding Fathers.
We've even had a judge say that though America is a nation with predominantly Christians, the government itself is secular.
Even many Christians were on board to keep a wall between church and state so the dogma of one denomination cannot impede upon the beliefs of another denomination.
Amd you said it yourself. Founded with no official religion. That means secular.

I never said that the USA was founded as a Christian nation.

However, I noticed that you left out the second part of the first sentence of the First Amendment:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"

In other words, the Federal government has NO authority to interfere in religion, but frequently does, anyway.

The phrase "separation of Church and State" is routinely offered up as an example of this secularism, but it appears nowhere in the entire Constitution.

The Constitution actually cannot prevent a state from adopting an official religion (although none have). The prohibition on establishing a religion, per the Constitution, only applies to the Federal Government.

Founded with "no official religion" does not mean "secular." The Constitution never explicitly mentions God or the divine, but the same cannot be said of the nation's state constitutions. In fact, God or the divine is mentioned at least once in each of the 50 state constitutions and nearly 200 times overall.
 

Wandering Monk

Well-Known Member
I never said that the USA was founded as a Christian nation.

However, I noticed that you left out the second part of the first sentence of the First Amendment:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"

In other words, the Federal government has NO authority to interfere in religion, but frequently does, anyway.

The phrase "separation of Church and State" is routinely offered up as an example of this secularism, but it appears nowhere in the entire Constitution.

The Constitution actually cannot prevent a state from adopting an official religion (although none have). The prohibition on establishing a religion, per the Constitution, only applies to the Federal Government.

Founded with "no official religion" does not mean "secular." The Constitution never explicitly mentions God or the divine, but the same cannot be said of the nation's state constitutions. In fact, God or the divine is mentioned at least once in each of the 50 state constitutions and nearly 200 times overall.

There are no unrestricted rights. By your reckoning there is no reason for the government to stop ANY religious practice at all. Obviously, this can't be a sustainable argument because any number of practices would be illegal today, such as taking illegal drugs or child sacrifice as part of religious ritual.
 
Top